Editorial & Advertiser Disclosure Global Banking And Finance Review is an independent publisher which offers News, information, Analysis, Opinion, Press Releases, Reviews, Research reports covering various economies, industries, products, services and companies. The content available on globalbankingandfinance.com is sourced by a mixture of different methods which is not limited to content produced and supplied by various staff writers, journalists, freelancers, individuals, organizations, companies, PR agencies Sponsored Posts etc. The information available on this website is purely for educational and informational purposes only. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any of the information provided at globalbankingandfinance.com with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. Globalbankingandfinance.com also links to various third party websites and we cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of the information provided by third party websites. Links from various articles on our site to third party websites are a mixture of non-sponsored links and sponsored links. Only a very small fraction of the links which point to external websites are affiliate links. Some of the links which you may click on our website may link to various products and services from our partners who may compensate us if you buy a service or product or fill a form or install an app. This will not incur additional cost to you. A very few articles on our website are sponsored posts or paid advertorials. These are marked as sponsored posts at the bottom of each post. For avoidance of any doubts and to make it easier for you to differentiate sponsored or non-sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles on our site or all links to external websites as sponsored . Please note that some of the services or products which we talk about carry a high level of risk and may not be suitable for everyone. These may be complex services or products and we request the readers to consider this purely from an educational standpoint. The information provided on this website is general in nature. Global Banking & Finance Review expressly disclaims any liability without any limitation which may arise directly or indirectly from the use of such information.

Can Hong Kong keep its status as a global financial centre

Hong Kong has traditionally been seen as a tax haven and the financial hub of Asia, if not the world. The island is well-known for its no and low taxation on foreign residents and corporations. However, the last six months of social and political unrest in Hong Kong has begun to take a toll on the region’s economy, fuelled by a sceptical audience of both individuals and businesses who are concerned that the continued unrest will have an adverse impact on the use of Hong Kong companies in both trading and asset protection.

Granville Turner, Director at company formation specialists, Turner Little, says: “In the midst of the general unrest in Hong Kong, the big question on everyone’s minds at the moment is ‘has the possibility of draconian measures being imposed by China, caused additional risk?’ As Hong Kong enters its first recession in a decade, the invocation of a draconian law to dissipate months of unrest could plunge the city into a worse crisis.

“Hong Kong has always been seen as having the world’s freest economy with its simple and low tax system, trade freedom, monetary freedom and government integrity. Hong Kong’s status as the financial hub of Asia, has always been protected by its ease of doing business, it’s unique role between China and the rest of the world and the rule of law. But if it loses its status as one of Asia’s top financial centres, it could be disastrous.

“To understand the impact, there are two aspects we need to consider. Firstly, is China likely to do anything that affects its value of Hong Kong? It’s unlikely, China believes Hong Kong to be a valuable asset, and therefore wouldn’t risk it being destroyed. But secondly, what if they do?

“Last month, the IMF released a report which reinforced its assessment of Hong Kong’s economic and financial positions[1]; affirming Hong Kong’s position as a global financial centre and regional trading hub with one of the most open economies in the world. This came after the Hong Kong government confirmed it had entered its first recession for a decade, with the economy shrinking 3.2% from July – September 2019[2]. There is no lack of competition for financial centres, and investors can easily turn to other cities such as Singapore, Tokyo and Shanghai.

“Unsurprisingly, companies established in Hong Kong are placed there, unless intended to trade, for tax efficiency purposes, in addition to asset protection and confidentiality. In the majority of cases, Hong Kong company assets are not actually in Hong Kong, same goes for the associated bank accounts and the people controlling these companies – they’re all over the world. They will no doubt have remained in control of the Hong Kong companies they have established, and should, if they have been set up properly, be able to transfer any assets from these companies efficiently and easily, should the turmoil escalate to the point the businesses are impacted. The only time a problem might arise, if they have allowed control of the companies to become vested within Hong Kong.”

“Safety fears are prompting the ultra-wealthy to consider other jurisdictions when it comes to offshore banking and asset protection. According to an estimate from Goldman Sachs Group Inc, the potential benefit to Singapore from the turmoil in Hong Kong is upwards of US$4 billion[3]. This represents the upper estimate of the money investors have already moved to Singapore amid escalating political protests.

It’s important to remember that the owners and controllers of assets managed through a Hong Kong company can consider moving their assets to alternative jurisdictions, but why would they? The assets are invariably outside of Hong Kong anyway, and vested in companies which can simply transfer ownership to other companies that are domiciled in another jurisdiction.”